Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/In it success


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. —  Aitias  // discussion 00:21, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

In it success

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia is not a dictionary Rtphokie (talk) 20:25, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Although you are correct, it is still a point of reference, and In-It Success is a term that is gaining great popularity in the area and for those who are unfamiliar with the term, this would be a great reference point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.8.54.235 (talk) 20:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you provide any references for it? Those in the article do not support the definition the article puts forward. Gonzonoir (talk) 20:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong delete Wikipedia is not a dictionary, and this is not a definition: cited sources don't refer to this phraseology, but to coincidences of "in" and "IT" next to one another. The construction of the phrase makes Googling for references very tough, but none have been offered and after a quick search I have found none. Gonzonoir (talk) 20:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Common usage or not, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 20:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - This is either non-notable, made up, or a hoax. There are no Ghits for "in it success" as far as I can tell.  There are some results, but they are for the juxtaposition of "in" and IT (information technology) success. &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  21:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * In It Delete no common usage, and Wikipedia is still not a dictionary pablo hablo. 23:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as a neologism not in regular use. Tony Fox (arf!) 23:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems to just be local slang and Wikipedia is not a slang dictionary or even a dictionary at all. Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 23:20, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment moved here from talk page This article should not be subject to deletion based on the public's misunderstanding of the term. In it success is something very important to many people - and not just people in the Mid-Michigan area. I currently reside in San Diego and was pleased to read about such a positive, motivating subject. In this age of tragedy and terror, seeing something so positive posted on this site made my day. Please, don't deprive others of this fantastic experience. 35.8.54.250 (talk) 17:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Note that 35.8.54.250 geolocates to the Michigan State University, as does 35.8.54.235 pablo hablo. 22:51, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Firstly, almost everyone who has voted delete did so partly or wholly because Wikipedia is not the place for dictionary definition. Secondly, whilst reading that page might have been a "fantastic experience" for you, that's not what an encyclopaedia is meant for. If you're so keen to provide others with the positive experience of reading a dictionary definition, you can either post it on Wikitionary if they'll accept it, or your own webpage if they don't. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also the whole business of "In this age of tragedy and terror, seeing something so positive posted on this site made my day. Please, don't deprive others of this fantastic experience." screams of WP:ILIKEIT. We have also have oodles of positive/upbeat articles like puppies, Sesame Street, Optimism, To Write Love on Her Arms and indie pop, which makes that argument pretty ridiculous. I mean, the article is still a dictionary definition. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Try Urban Dictionary or Wiktionary instead. Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 18:16, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.